Skip to main content

LIC pulled up, asked to pay Rs. 1.06 lakh for harassing claimant

Life Insurance Corporation has been pulled up by a consumer forum here for "knowingly harassing" the widow of a policy holder by denying her claim and directed to pay her Rs. 1.06 lakh.

The New Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum noted that as per the conditions of the policy issued to the complainant's husband no medical report was required, but LIC had denied the claim on the ground that he had not disclosed that he had been suffering from TB for over four years.

"We have gone through the contents of complaint and noticed that non-medical policy for sum assured of Rs. 50,000 was issued to the complainant by opposite party (LIC) over which there is no medical report is required as per norms of LIC policy.

"Despite the above facts, opposite party deliberately/arbitrarily denied the claim without supporting evidence which is a clear case of deficiency/unfair trade practice that opposite party knowingly harassed consumers without any reason except to suck the blood just like a blood hounder as if money goes from LIC officials' pocket," a bench presided by CK Chaturvedi said.

The forum directed LIC to pay Delhi resident Hasmukhi Devi the assured amount of Rs. 50,000 under the policy along with Rs. 35,000 as compensation and Rs. 21,000 as cost of litigation.

According to Devi, her husband Ram Avtar, who was insured under a LIC policy since December 12, 2003 for a sum of Rs. 50,000 had died on April 11, 2005, during the period of the insurance cover.

She had filed the claim for assured amount after that and the same was rejected by LIC.

LIC had rejected the claim on the ground that her husband had been suffering from TB for over four years and had not disclosed the same while availing the policy.

Article referred: http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-news/NewDelhi/LIC-pulled-up-asked-to-pay-Rs-1-06-lakh-for-harassing-claimant/Article1-1095981.aspx

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

When debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, the court will not wind up the company

In SHITAL FIBERS LTD.  vs  INDIAN ACRYLICS LIMITED, as per the respondent, appellant had made a payment of Rs.61,83,218/­. However, there was an outstanding balance of Rs.8,92,723/­ as on 28.7.2008. Since despite repeated requests, balance amount was not paid, the respondent issued a statutory notice to the appellant. The same was duly responded to. As the payment was not made despite notice being duly served on the appellant, the respondent filed the aforesaid Company Petition seeking winding up of the present appellant for its inability to pay admitted debts. The learned Company Judge vide order dated 28.9.2015 admitted the Company Petition. However, while doing so, the learned Company Judge observed, that since the appellant was an on­going concern, an opportunity should be granted to it to settle the accounts with the respondent by 31.12.2015. Only in case of failure of the settlement, the citation was directed to be published. On appeal, the Division Bench of the High Cou...
Post a Comment
Read more

Abusing in-laws a ground for divorce: SC

Abusing in-laws and not allowing them to reside in the matrimonial home by a woman amounts to cruelty to her spouse, ground enough for grant of divorce, the Supreme Court has ruled while allowing an NRI's plea for legal separation from his wife. A bench of Justices Vikaramajit Sen and A M Sapre said such incidents could not be termed as "wear and tear" of family life as held by Madras High Court which had said that a couple must be prepared to face such situations in matrimonial relationship. The NRI had filed a divorce petition alleging that his wife was abusive to his family members and did not allow his parents and siblings to stay in his house when they visited the US. Referring to an incident, the husband told the court that his wife had once locked him and his sister out of the house and abused them saying they belonged to a 'prostitute family'. She refused to allow her sister-in-law to enter the house and even lodged a police complaint against her hu...
4 comments
Read more